Putin Dissolves Russian Government?!

Post Reply New Topic

I just heard on the Daily Show that Vladimir Putin dissolved much of Russia's government, including dismissing his prime minister, and conducted a test of a superweapon dubbed, "The Father of All Bombs". The way they were making jokes ABOUT it, it seemed the story was real, yet I heard nothing about this in the national news.

Has anyone else heard about this? If that's real, I personally consider the potential for a second Cold-War a LOT more disturbing than Bin Laden's latest home movies.

I learn all the real news on John Stewart....I believe it is real.It is very strnge that the "real news" hasnt reported it but it all over the internet...just frickin bizzar world we live in.CNN will keep you updated on if Britney Spears is wearing underwear but....Russia,...trivia.Maybe if Britney doesnt do anything fun tomorrow(or Paris Hilton)they will talk about it.

Did you hear about Israel atacking Syria???I just heard a small blurb,then nothing more???OK folks...WWIII will only be televised on John Stewart,hope you can wait until 10pm to hear about it.....

Putin names surprise nominee for premier

Israelis face New Year with new concerns

Putin changes his government about as often as I change my underwear. As for the Father of all Bombs it's just a Russian version of a fuel-air device with a slightly bigger yield, and something far more safer than a nuclear weapon. The people you should be really worried about are in Iran, if the inspection teams are correct then the Iranians will have enough material for thirty nuclear devices by the end of next year.

Ed Almos

FUD

Something Mr Saxon is good at spreading, eh, ahayes?

*blasts QM with gamma laser screwdriver*

Ow.

Hey guy's, it's burned a hole right through me. Wouldja look at that, right through me. Guys? Maybe you should get me to a Doctor, it is really starting to hurt. This is not something you can ignore...

Guys?

[/tumbleweed]

Oh.

It is within Putin's power to dissolve the Duma if he doesn't like the way they vote, it is not all that infrequent.

Edal wrote...

'The people you should be really worried about are in Iran, if the inspection teams are correct then the Iranians will have enough material for thirty nuclear devices by the end of next year. '

I fear the US more than I fear Iran!
Maybe if they manage a deterrent then the US won't make them next on the list.
Why is it OK for the most war hungry nation on earth [check the track record, the US has invaded more nations than anyone in the last 100 years] to possess nukes but no-one else - thats BS!
peace j

Most of the invasions by the US within the last 100 years were a part of a greater war between powers, not capriciousness. Other nations are trusted with nukes, in fact, many 1st world nations have nukes, the issue is that non-1st world nations are not trusted. The non-1st world nations are regarded as unstable and that is the major reason for trying to prevent them from possessing nukes. The US is still considered relatively stable, and it has shown little inclination to threaten 1st world nations, only foolishly play with broken ones.

@ Awesomelyglorious

You are tripping? not out of capriciousness - OUT OF GREED and PREJUDICE!

The Philippines
Guatemala
Granada
Viet Nam
Iraq x2
......

The US Army is effectively an army for hire by US corporate interests.
The US suffers a crisis of confidence or an economic crisis - someone gets invaded.
peace j

Not really tripping. We don't actually benefit much from most of the wars there, and there are only occasional issues of prejudice like would be found in many nations. I think that the historical view you take is undeservedly negative of the US, which definitely makes foreign policy mistakes and has been aggressive, but has done so in a context where these actions make some level of sense.

That was a part of the Spanish-American war where it was strongly believed that the Spanish attacked one of our ships. That ended up being false but everyone at the time believed that. We later let them have independence.
A part of the Cold War fears.

Also part of the Cold War
Another part of the Cold War
Time #1 was a response by many 1st world nations to the invasion of Kuwait. Time#2 was an idiotic mission by a foolish president.


We have actually been the least imperialist nation if one looks at the records, unless the British Empire was really fuzzier. Our imperial holdings were quite minimal by standards at that time. The other issues mentioned were very strongly motivated by other political forces and not necessarily economic elites.

Not really true for much of our history, and in the more modern era what we often find is that the US is effectively the strong-arm against the West's enemies, this includes communism, this includes various destructive regimes. Removing these issues from their historical context removes a lot of the meaning behind them. I am not going to claim that the US isn't at times controlling, however, it is not maniacally insane, and truly, in a few of the issues shown, greed really is not a powerful reason for these actions so much as fighting some perceived enemy of the Western powers.

Least Imperialistic? what about the Monroe Doctrine?

The monroe doctrine that stated that we did not want European powers meddling in the Americas? How is that very imperialistic? The worst that goes is that it forces us to occasionally intervene in the Americas in order to prevent a European power from doing so. More than anything else it is paranoiac paternalist though as we did not claim absolute power over the Americas, we simply said that we were not going to allow Europe to mess with the area. Given that there are intelligent historians that actually do deny that the US truly had an imperialist legacy, save the Philippines, I don't think that my claims are unwarranted. The earlier US was an isolationist power to a great extent, we merely had a few aberrations such as Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, WW2 and after though is when the foreign policy of the US changes.